scholarly journals Multidimensional Welfare Comparisons of EU Member States Before, During, and after the Financial Crisis: A Dominance Approach

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Azhar Hussain ◽  
Nikolaj Siersbbk ◽  
Lars Peter sterdal
2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 557-591
Author(s):  
Andri Fannar Bergþórsson

In response to the global financial crisis, the European System of Financial Supervision (ESFS) was created in 2010. Supranational bodies were established for different financial sectors to act as supervisors of sorts for national-level supervisors in EU Member States. This article focuses on how the system was adapted to three EFTA States that are not part of the EU but form the internal market along with EU Member States through the EEA Agreement – Iceland, Norway and Lichtenstein (EEA EFTA States). The aim is to clarify how ESFS has been incorporated into the EEA agreement and to discuss whether this a workable solution for the EEA EFTA States that have not transferred their sovereignty by name in the same manner as the EU Member States. One issue is whether the adaptation has gone beyond the limits of the two-pillar structure, as all initiative and work stem from the EU supranational bodies and not the EFTA pillar.


2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-54
Author(s):  
Mariya Paskaleva ◽  
Ani Stoykova

Financial globalization has opened international capital markets to investors and companies worldwide. However, the global financial crisis also caused massive stock price volatility due in part to global availability of market information. We explore ten EU member states (France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Belgium, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece, Portugal, Ireland, and Spain), and the USA. The explored period is March 3, 2003 to June 30, 2016, and includes the effects of the global financial crisis of 2008. The purpose of the article is to determine whether there is a contagion effect between the Bulgarian stock market and the other examined stock markets during the crisis period and whether these markets are efficient. We apply an augmented Dickey-Fuller test, DCC-GARCH model, autoregressive (AR) models, TGARCH model, and descriptive statistics. Our results show that a contagion between the Bulgarian capital market and the eight capital markets examined did exist during the global financial crisis of 2008. We register the strongest contagion effects from the U.S. and German capital markets on the Bulgarian capital market. The Bulgarian capital market is relatively integrated with the stock markets of Germany and the United State, which serves as an explanation of why the Bulgarian capital market was exposed to financial contagion effects from the U.S. capital market and the capital markets of EU member states during the crisis. We register statistically significant AR (1) for UK, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Romania, and Bulgaria, and we can define these global capital markets as inefficient.


Author(s):  
Eva Banincova

In 2008-09 the banking sectors of four Central and East European States and three Baltic States have experienced a large-scale financial crisis in the EU for the first time since becoming foreign-owned. Amongst the new EU member states Baltic States and Hungary were the worst affected economies. The paper first explores why the extent of crisis varied among these seven states by distinguishing major differences in the pre-crisis bank lending practices which reflect different macroeconomic developments and exchange rate policies in these states. Based on the analysis of bank performance indicators since 2008 and my interviews with representatives of major banks active in the region, the important role of foreign banks in mitigating the risks of financial contagion is outlined. The implication from the crisis is examined mainly from the perspective of the financial supervision and regulation in the enlarged EU. By inspecting the concrete experience of financial supervision authorities in the Baltic States the paper shows why the host country supervisors were not able to curb excessive lending and risk-taking by large Scandinavian banks. Since it is expected that the new EU regulatory and supervisory framework will reinforce the financial stability in the case of large cross-border banking groups, the paper addresses the issues in the financial crisis prevention, management are resolution in the new EU member states which will improve based on the new EU regulatory and supervisory framework for credit institutions.


Author(s):  
Anastasia Poulou

Having been affected by the European financial crisis that erupted in 2008, several EU Member States required financial assistance beyond that available in the financial markets. New financial assistance mechanisms, such as the EFSF and ESM, were created under international law and all financial assistance packages included the participation of the IMF. Despite their differences, these financial assistance schemes all combined supranational and international legal instruments and institutions. The hybrid nature of this European financial assistance raises the question of whether the actors involved in the award of the assistance are bound by EU and international human rights. Against this background, this chapter assesses financial assistance conditionality as applied by the different financial institutions from an EU and international human rights perspective, aiming to respond to the question whether European and international actors are bound by human rights when preparing financial assistance conditions.


Significance The talks will focus on fiscal performance ahead of drafting the 2019 budget, in the light of a major policy speech by Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras in Thessaloniki in which he promised a relaxation of many of the strictures imposed during Greece’s bailouts. With an eye on approaching elections, the Syriza-led government has announced extensive economic handouts, claiming it can finance them without recourse to the pension cuts and tax hikes demanded by creditors in June in exchange for debt relief. Impacts Domestic political uncertainty and Turkey’s financial crisis are keeping spreads on Greek bonds wider than those of other EU member states. The government claims it has a reserve of some 20 billion euros, sufficient to cover borrowing needs for two-and-a-half years. With investment flows sluggish, privatisation will proceed slowly and there is minimal productive investment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document